Elderly Drivers

[dannyfrankszzz[_11_]]

In the past week, on 3 occasions I've been nearly very badly injured by
inept elderly drivers. The problem is that on all 3 occasions they
simply did not see me. Even when I shouted loudly at them, they seemed
to be completely oblivious.

I live in an affluent area of London and so I guess there are probably
more old people around with nice cars and time on their hands than in
other areas.

However, it is incredibly irritating when people don't drive properly
regardless of age.

This is something that's going to become more of a problem and is
something the government is going to need to think about. Personally,
I'd ban people over the age of 70 from driving.


--
dannyfrankszzz

[[email protected]]

On 20 Sep, 12:17, dannyfrankszzz <dannyfrankszzz.2x7...@no-
mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
> In the past week, on 3 occasions I've been nearly very badly injured by
> inept elderly drivers. The problem is that on all 3 occasions they
> simply did not see me. Even when I shouted loudly at them, they seemed
> to be completely oblivious.
>
> I live in an affluent area of London and so I guess there are probably
> more old people around with nice cars and time on their hands than in
> other areas.
>
> However, it is incredibly irritating when people don't drive properly
> regardless of age.
>
> This is something that's going to become more of a problem and is
> something the government is going to need to think about. Personally,
> I'd ban people over the age of 70 from driving.
>
> --
> dannyfrankszzz

If I were "king for a day" I would pass a law that from one year after
normal retirement age all drivers would need to pass an annual medical
and take an annual driving test to prove their continued competance.
Over the age of 70 the test would become more strict with incentives
to give up driving altogether. I would do this because I have:

1) Been hit in my car by a pensioner, also in a car, driving down the
middle of the road who then claimed to her insurance company that she
was stationary at the time of the incident.

2) Almost been knocked off the road into a deep pond on my bike by a
pensioner in a car who overtook me on a blind corner and then
instantly turned left across me.

3) Witnessed my girlfriend's parked car being written-off by a
pensioner in a car who tried to simply drive away only being stopped
by the fact one of her front wheels was now at a right angle to the
direction it should have pointed.

4) Had to convince my Grandfather to give up driving at night because
of his cataracts after the doctor's assessment had been " Are you
alright to drive? Yes? OK, then carry on"

Rant over,

David

[PhilD]

On Sep 20, 12:39 pm, "
> wrote:
> If I were "king for a day" I would pass a law that from one year after
> normal retirement age all drivers would need to pass an annual medical
> and take an annual driving test to prove their continued competance.
> Over the age of 70 the test would become more strict with incentives
> to give up driving altogether. I would do this because I have:

<snip>


If *I* were "king for a day" I would do something similar, but I
wouldn't limit it to pensioners. Regular retesting of all would also
be a part of my scheme, with incentives not to drive at all.

But I'm not king... :-(

PhilD

--
<><

[Paul Boyd]

said the following on 20/09/2007 12:39:

> If I were "king for a day" I would pass a law that from one year after
> normal retirement age all drivers would need to pass an annual medical
> and take an annual driving test to prove their continued competance.
> Over the age of 70 the test would become more strict with incentives
> to give up driving altogether.

Personally, I would extend that to make *all* drivers have to retake
their test every 5 years (and I am a driver, so this would apply to me),
then going onto the annual test at retirement age.

> 4) Had to convince my Grandfather to give up driving at night because
> of his cataracts after the doctor's assessment had been " Are you
> alright to drive? Yes? OK, then carry on"

Eventually my grandmother has given up driving for much the same reason,
although in her case she should have given up 50 years ago! There's
something very wrong with a system that allows people with extremely
poor vision to continue driving with no more than a "Yes? OK, then carry on"

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

[Teredo]

> I'd ban people over the age of 70 from driving.
> > dannyfrankszzz

Danny, will your 70 year rule apply to cyclists too?

[John Kane]

On Sep 20, 7:17 am, dannyfrankszzz <dannyfrankszzz.2x7...@no-
mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
> In the past week, on 3 occasions I've been nearly very badly injured by
> inept elderly drivers. The problem is that on all 3 occasions they
> simply did not see me. Even when I shouted loudly at them, they seemed
> to be completely oblivious.
>
> I live in an affluent area of London and so I guess there are probably
> more old people around with nice cars and time on their hands than in
> other areas.
>
> However, it is incredibly irritating when people don't drive properly
> regardless of age.
>
> This is something that's going to become more of a problem and is
> something the government is going to need to think about. Personally,
> I'd ban people over the age of 70 from driving.
>
> --
> dannyfrankszzz

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070912/driving_dementia_070912/20070912?hub=Health

[John Kane]

On Sep 20, 8:26 am, Teredo > wrote:
> > I'd ban people over the age of 70 from driving.
> > > dannyfrankszzz
>
> Danny, will your 70 year rule apply to cyclists too?

I'm not Danny but I don't see why it would. Few cycles weigh half a
tonne or more and travel at 100+ km/h.

John Kane, Kingston ON Canada

[David Lloyd]

On 20 Sep, 12:50, PhilD > wrote:
> On Sep 20, 12:39 pm, "
>
> > wrote:
> > If I were "king for a day" I would pass a law that from one year after
> > normal retirement age all drivers would need to pass an annual medical
> > and take an annual driving test to prove their continued competance.
> > Over the age of 70 the test would become more strict with incentives
> > to give up driving altogether. I would do this because I have:
>
> <snip>
>
> If *I* were "king for a day" I would do something similar, but I
> wouldn't limit it to pensioners. Regular retesting of all would also
> be a part of my scheme, with incentives not to drive at all.
>
> But I'm not king... :-(
>
> PhilD
>

This is only a constitutional monarchy, so you will need to be the
Prime Minister.

David Lloyd (at work)

[Marc]

Paul Boyd wrote:
> said the following on 20/09/2007 12:39:
>
>> If I were "king for a day" I would pass a law that from one year after
>> normal retirement age all drivers would need to pass an annual medical
>> and take an annual driving test to prove their continued competance.
>> Over the age of 70 the test would become more strict with incentives
>> to give up driving altogether.
>
> Personally, I would extend that to make *all* drivers have to retake
> their test every 5 years (and I am a driver, so this would apply to me),
> then going onto the annual test at retirement age.
>
>> 4) Had to convince my Grandfather to give up driving at night because
>> of his cataracts after the doctor's assessment had been " Are you
>> alright to drive? Yes? OK, then carry on"
>
> Eventually my grandmother has given up driving for much the same reason,
> although in her case she should have given up 50 years ago! There's
> something very wrong with a system that allows people with extremely
> poor vision to continue driving with no more than a "Yes? OK, then carry
> on"


There is something worse wrong with a system that gives out cars under
Motability to people who are registered disabled because their
disability is that they are blind in one eye and have tunnel vision in
the other.

[Brian G]

dannyfrankszzz wrote:
> In the past week, on 3 occasions I've been nearly very badly injured by
> inept elderly drivers. The problem is that on all 3 occasions they
> simply did not see me. Even when I shouted loudly at them, they seemed
> to be completely oblivious.
>
> I live in an affluent area of London and so I guess there are probably
> more old people around with nice cars and time on their hands than in
> other areas.
>
> However, it is incredibly irritating when people don't drive properly
> regardless of age.
>
> This is something that's going to become more of a problem and is
> something the government is going to need to think about. Personally,
> I'd ban people over the age of 70 from driving.

Personally, I'd ban people under the age of 60 from posting rubbish. It
is probably the case that with increasing age comes an increasing risk
of attention deficit, but to set an arbitrary bar at age 70 is a
distasteful suggestion, to put it mildly. Try reading, for example, Age
related changes in drivers' crash risk and crash type; G. Anthony Ryan,
Matthew Legge and Diana Rosman, Road Accident Prevention Research Unit,
Department of Public Health, University of Western Australia, 1999

Drivers aged 70 and over are shown to have a relatively high involvement
in serious / fatal crashes, but in terms of overall numbers of crashes,
their involvement is very small compared to, say, drivers aged under 30
years.

The answer to inept driving is proper prosecution of all erring drivers
and a sentencing policy which acts as true deterrent to the sort of
behaviour we see daily on the roads from drivers of all age groups.
There is a current attitude in the UK that road traffic law is unlike
other areas of legislation and that breaking such laws is our
fundamental right. I watched a young woman only yesterday driving two
small children, presumably to school, with one hand clamping her mobile
phone to her ear. If she was even caught, how would she be punished?
An irritating fine and three penalty points she can wear with some sort
of perverse pride, as some sort of battle scars?

Elderly drivers need to consider their fitness to drive, of course, and
there are provisions in place, however inadequate at present, to address
this. But if we're going to ban drivers en masse(and I'm not saying I'd
be opposed to the idea) let's at least target the people who cause the
majority of the problems.


--
Brian G
www.wetwo.co.uk

[Paul Boyd]

marc said the following on 20/09/2007 14:28:

> There is something worse wrong with a system that gives out cars under
> Motability to people who are registered disabled because their
> disability is that they are blind in one eye and have tunnel vision in
> the other.

You are joking, of course. You are, aren't you?????? If this tunnel
vision is anything like I get with ophthalmic migraines, then there is
no way someone with that permanently should be driving.

I know years ago we used to have a guy at work with only one eye, and he
told us that he wasn't allowed to drive because of that.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

[Marc]

Paul Boyd wrote:
> marc said the following on 20/09/2007 14:28:
>
>> There is something worse wrong with a system that gives out cars under
>> Motability to people who are registered disabled because their
>> disability is that they are blind in one eye and have tunnel vision in
>> the other.
>
> You are joking, of course. You are, aren't you??????
Nope! One of my employees turned up in a brand new car one day , I
asked him where it had come from ( I knew I didn't pay him enough) and
he explained that it was his fathers, via motobility , cos of his eyesight


If this tunnel
> vision is anything like I get with ophthalmic migraines, then there is
> no way someone with that permanently should be driving.
>
> I know years ago we used to have a guy at work with only one eye, and he
> told us that he wasn't allowed to drive because of that.

That wouldn't have disbarred him as long as he can read a number plate
at X metres, he's in

[Helen Deborah Vecht]

Paul Boyd <usenet.is.worse@plusnet>typed


> marc said the following on 20/09/2007 14:28:

> > There is something worse wrong with a system that gives out cars under
> > Motability to people who are registered disabled because their
> > disability is that they are blind in one eye and have tunnel vision in
> > the other.

> You are joking, of course. You are, aren't you?????? If this tunnel
> vision is anything like I get with ophthalmic migraines, then there is
> no way someone with that permanently should be driving.

> I know years ago we used to have a guy at work with only one eye, and he
> told us that he wasn't allowed to drive because of that.

I believe driving with one eye is permitted so long as the vision with
the remainig eye allows a number plate to be read at the specified
distance. requirements for PCVs and HGVs may be stricter.

--
Helen D. Vecht:
Edgware.

[[email protected]]

On Sep 20, 12:51 pm, Paul Boyd <usenet.is.worse@plusnet> wrote:

> Personally, I would extend that to make *all* drivers have to retake
> their test every 5 years (and I am a driver, so this would apply to me),
> then going onto the annual test at retirement age.
>

I'd make it every three years if you took the standard driving test
and every five or six years if you took a higher standard test (IAM,
ROSPA, something like that).

That way there's an incentive for people to take further training.

Tim.

[[email protected]]

On Sep 20, 3:26 pm, marc > wrote:
>
> Nope! One of my employees turned up in a brand new car one day , I
> asked him where it had come from ( I knew I didn't pay him enough) and
> he explained that it was his fathers, via motobility , cos of his eyesight

I think you can get a motability car even if you can't physically
drive. The idea being that then your carer can drive you around.
BICBW.

Tim.

[Paul Boyd]

said the following on 20/09/2007 16:12:

> I'd make it every three years if you took the standard driving test
> and every five or six years if you took a higher standard test (IAM,
> ROSPA, something like that).

IAM? Higher? Pah!!! I went right off that years ago during a court
case. The woman who drove into my car very carefully explained why she
did what she did - things like:-

"It wasn't a roundabout, it's a motorway junction so roundabout rules
don't apply." (Jcn 21 M5 - a typical motorway roundabout)

"I wasn't indicating right because I was going straight on and people
would think I was going right if I indicated right" (She was going right)

"I used the left hand lane to turn right because it's difficult to get
into that lane at my exit" (and in doing so swept straight across a dual
carriageway exit)

There was more along those lines. Then she muttered to her solicitor,
who shook his head. The magistrate wanted to know what was said. The
defendant said that she wanted it brought to the court's attention that
she has passed the IAM test...

This was a case with no recorded witnesses, and it went 100% in my
favour, by the way. It was unusual in that by and large both parties
agreed with what happened.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

[Rob Morley]

In article >,
dannyfrankszzz
says...

> However, it is incredibly irritating when people don't drive properly
> regardless of age.
>
> This is something that's going to become more of a problem and is
> something the government is going to need to think about. Personally,
> I'd ban people over the age of 70 from driving.
>
So all crap drivers are irritating/dangerous, but you're only going to
ban the old ones?
I'd introduce retests for all drivers, every 5 years or so, and require
a proper eye test too.

[Clive George]

"Paul Boyd" <usenet.is.worse@plusnet> wrote in message
...
> said the following on 20/09/2007 16:12:
>
>> I'd make it every three years if you took the standard driving test
>> and every five or six years if you took a higher standard test (IAM,
>> ROSPA, something like that).
>
> IAM? Higher? Pah!!! I went right off that years ago during a court
> case. The woman who drove into my car very carefully explained why she
> did what she did - things like:-

<snip dimness on part of IAM driver>

Tee hee. There was a case near here where a guy who'd just passed his IAM
test went on to knock a cyclist over on a mini-roundabout - on the same day.
He got done for careless driving.

cheers,
cliev

[congokid]

In article >,
dannyfrankszzz >
writes

>However, it is incredibly irritating when people don't drive properly
>regardless of age.
>
>This is something that's going to become more of a problem and is
>something the government is going to need to think about. Personally,
>I'd ban people over the age of 70 from driving.

My guest (an ex bunny girl from the 70s, as it happens) at lunch today
says her mum in Scotland is almost 90 and still drives around - in fact
she's going on a driving tour some time in the next few weeks. She
didn't mention any 'incidents' so I presume that for the moment her mum
is fine behind the wheel. It could be a challenge to prise her fingers
from the steering wheel when the time does come.
--
congokid
Eating out in London? Read my tips...
http://congokid.com

[Niall Wallace]

"John Kane" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> On Sep 20, 8:26 am, Teredo > wrote:
>> > I'd ban people over the age of 70 from driving.
>> > > dannyfrankszzz
>>
>> Danny, will your 70 year rule apply to cyclists too?
>
> I'm not Danny but I don't see why it would. Few cycles weigh half a
> tonne or more and travel at 100+ km/h.

May be the case but doesn't stop them doing totally stupid things on the
road.

Niall

[Eatmorepies[_2_]]

"dannyfrankszzz" >
wrote in message
...
>
> In the past week, on 3 occasions I've been nearly very badly injured by
> inept elderly drivers. The problem is that on all 3 occasions they
> simply did not see me. Even when I shouted loudly at them, they seemed
> to be completely oblivious.
>
> I live in an affluent area of London and so I guess there are probably
> more old people around with nice cars and time on their hands than in
> other areas.
>
> However, it is incredibly irritating when people don't drive properly
> regardless of age.
>
> This is something that's going to become more of a problem and is
> something the government is going to need to think about. Personally,
> I'd ban people over the age of 70 from driving.
>

An arbitary age limit is too blunt an instrument - I suspect men aged 18-23
are much more dangerous. Take the obviously bad ones off the road, a few
more police on patrol might help with this one.

On another tack, were you helping drivers to see you? When I go out in dull
conditions or ride in high traffic conditions I wear a hi vis jacket or
waistcoat. I know that in dull conditions that when I'm driving my car some
cyclists/pedestrians are very hard to see. This is on the unlit roads around
Mid-Wales. Coming home on Monday at dusk I saw an unlit bike with the rider
dressed in steath green to match the hedges - but only after I was
uncomfortably close to him (uncomfortable for me). And yes, I did have my
headlights on. There was also a brown horse and rider in farmer's green
clothing, luckily the horse had a big patch of white hair on it's backside
so I saw it in plenty of time to slow down and move over safely.

You may argue that it's a driver's responsibility to see other road users
but for self preservation I love Hi vis. (I always have my headlight on when
I ride my motor bike).

John

[Martin Dann]

wrote:
>
> 4) Had to convince my Grandfather to give up driving at night because
> of his cataracts after the doctor's assessment had been " Are you
> alright to drive? Yes? OK, then carry on"


Myself, I think that all road users should have a periodic
eye test and certificate to drive on the roads. The period
could be anywhere between 6 months and 5 years depending
on the drivers age, medical condition, and the vehicle he
is driving.

Martin.

[[email protected]]

In message >
"Eatmorepies" > wrote:

> An arbitary age limit is too blunt an instrument

I hope road users who drive seriously are aware of their
responsibilities - I drive and ride better as a result of IAM driver
training, and I am looking forward to my cycle-specific LCC training
on Monday.

At age 65 I am looking to enjoy it.

> On another tack, were you helping drivers to see you? When I go out in dull
> conditions or ride in high traffic conditions I wear a hi vis jacket or
> waistcoat. I know that in dull conditions that when I'm driving my car some
> cyclists/pedestrians are very hard to see.

Exacly so. Dull doesn't only apply to weather, but to all traffic and
driver conditions, so I always wear a Hi-Viz waistcoat and have lights
on, day and night.

Is there a cooler Hi-Viz? The extra layer is so hot it is
discouraging. I suppose it is the heavy plastic fluorescent srips
weighing it down, even when unzipped.

--
Charles
Brompton P-type T6 in Motspur Park
LCC; CTC.

[Bernie]

On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 20:17:04 +0100, Eatmorepies wrote:

>
> "dannyfrankszzz" >
> wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> In the past week, on 3 occasions I've been nearly very badly injured by
>> inept elderly drivers. The problem is that on all 3 occasions they
>> simply did not see me. Even when I shouted loudly at them, they seemed
>> to be completely oblivious.
>>
>> I live in an affluent area of London and so I guess there are probably
>> more old people around with nice cars and time on their hands than in
>> other areas.
>>
>> However, it is incredibly irritating when people don't drive properly
>> regardless of age.
>>
>> This is something that's going to become more of a problem and is
>> something the government is going to need to think about. Personally,
>> I'd ban people over the age of 70 from driving.
>>
>
> An arbitary age limit is too blunt an instrument - I suspect men aged 18-23
> are much more dangerous. Take the obviously bad ones off the road, a few
> more police on patrol might help with this one.
>
> On another tack, were you helping drivers to see you? When I go out in dull
> conditions or ride in high traffic conditions I wear a hi vis jacket or
> waistcoat.

I always wear black. Black bike too.

The people who come too close to me have always been old fogeys.

I would agree that 70 and over is too old for driving motor vehicles
generally speaking.

[Bernie]

On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 15:01:42 +0100, Brian G wrote:

> dannyfrankszzz wrote:
>> In the past week, on 3 occasions I've been nearly very badly injured by
>> inept elderly drivers. The problem is that on all 3 occasions they
>> simply did not see me. Even when I shouted loudly at them, they seemed
>> to be completely oblivious.
>>
>> I live in an affluent area of London and so I guess there are probably
>> more old people around with nice cars and time on their hands than in
>> other areas.
>>
>> However, it is incredibly irritating when people don't drive properly
>> regardless of age.
>>
>> This is something that's going to become more of a problem and is
>> something the government is going to need to think about. Personally,
>> I'd ban people over the age of 70 from driving.
>
> Personally, I'd ban people under the age of 60 from posting rubbish. It
> is probably the case that with increasing age comes an increasing risk
> of attention deficit, but to set an arbitrary bar at age 70 is a
> distasteful suggestion, to put it mildly. Try reading, for example, Age
> related changes in drivers' crash risk and crash type; G. Anthony Ryan,
> Matthew Legge and Diana Rosman, Road Accident Prevention Research Unit,
> Department of Public Health, University of Western Australia, 1999
>
> Drivers aged 70 and over are shown to have a relatively high involvement
> in serious / fatal crashes, but in terms of overall numbers of crashes,
> their involvement is very small compared to, say, drivers aged under 30
> years.

But you can potentially do something about the bad driving habits of the
young where as once the old are past it there's naff all you can do.

> The answer to inept driving is proper prosecution of all erring drivers

Old people who don't have the reaction times of younger people should be
banned from the road. It's pointless prosecuting them. They wont learn
a better reaction time like a young bloke could learn to drive more sanely.
Better to err on the side of caution and chuck em' off.

> and a sentencing policy which acts as true deterrent to the sort of
> behaviour we see daily on the roads from drivers of all age groups.

That will only work with drivers physically capable of changing or
modifying their driving habits. An old person cannot improve their
driving.

> There is a current attitude in the UK that road traffic law is unlike
> other areas of legislation and that breaking such laws is our
> fundamental right. I watched a young woman only yesterday driving two
> small children, presumably to school, with one hand clamping her mobile
> phone to her ear. If she was even caught, how would she be punished?
> An irritating fine and three penalty points she can wear with some sort
> of perverse pride, as some sort of battle scars?

And think how much worse it could be with an old fogey behind the wheel
with phone clamped to earhole.

> Elderly drivers need to consider their fitness to drive, of course, and

If they can.

> there are provisions in place, however inadequate at present,

And that is a reason to leave it as it is?

> to address
> this.

I don't think so.

> But if we're going to ban drivers en masse(and I'm not saying I'd
> be opposed to the idea) let's at least target the people who cause the
> majority of the problems.

The younger driver is not an appropriate target population for that sort
of ban but the elderly are.

[Bernie]

On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 19:43:16 +0100, Niall Wallace wrote:

> "John Kane" > wrote in message
> ups.com...
>> On Sep 20, 8:26 am, Teredo > wrote:
>>> > I'd ban people over the age of 70 from driving.
>>> > > dannyfrankszzz
>>>
>>> Danny, will your 70 year rule apply to cyclists too?
>>
>> I'm not Danny but I don't see why it would. Few cycles weigh half a
>> tonne or more and travel at 100+ km/h.
>
> May be the case but doesn't stop them doing totally stupid things on the
> road.
>
> Niall

Clapped out old people don't ride bikes but they do drive cars.

[Marc]

Bernie wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 15:01:42 +0100, Brian G wrote:
>
>> dannyfrankszzz wrote:
>>> In the past week, on 3 occasions I've been nearly very badly injured by
>>> inept elderly drivers. The problem is that on all 3 occasions they
>>> simply did not see me. Even when I shouted loudly at them, they seemed
>>> to be completely oblivious.
>>>
>>> I live in an affluent area of London and so I guess there are probably
>>> more old people around with nice cars and time on their hands than in
>>> other areas.
>>>
>>> However, it is incredibly irritating when people don't drive properly
>>> regardless of age.
>>>
>>> This is something that's going to become more of a problem and is
>>> something the government is going to need to think about. Personally,
>>> I'd ban people over the age of 70 from driving.
>> Personally, I'd ban people under the age of 60 from posting rubbish. It
>> is probably the case that with increasing age comes an increasing risk
>> of attention deficit, but to set an arbitrary bar at age 70 is a
>> distasteful suggestion, to put it mildly. Try reading, for example, Age
>> related changes in drivers' crash risk and crash type; G. Anthony Ryan,
>> Matthew Legge and Diana Rosman, Road Accident Prevention Research Unit,
>> Department of Public Health, University of Western Australia, 1999
>>
>> Drivers aged 70 and over are shown to have a relatively high involvement
>> in serious / fatal crashes, but in terms of overall numbers of crashes,
>> their involvement is very small compared to, say, drivers aged under 30
>> years.
>
> But you can potentially do something about the bad driving habits of the
> young where as once the old are past it there's naff all you can do.
>
>> The answer to inept driving is proper prosecution of all erring drivers
>
> Old people who don't have the reaction times of younger people should be
> banned from the road.

What about young people who don't have the reaction time of young
people, or middle aged people who don't have the reactions of young
people, or old people who have the reaction time of young people who
are tired, or middle aged people that are tired , or old people who
don't need to rely on reaction time because they have have made an
allowance that doesn't get them into a situation where they are relying
on reactions? Road traffic incidents are not normally accidents, don't
normally occur without warning and apart from single vehicle incidents
are not caused by by slow reaction times.
It's pointless prosecuting them. They wont learn
> a better reaction time like a young bloke could learn to drive more sanely.
> Better to err on the side of caution and chuck em' off.
>
>> and a sentencing policy which acts as true deterrent to the sort of
>> behaviour we see daily on the roads from drivers of all age groups.
>
> That will only work with drivers physically capable of changing or
> modifying their driving habits. An old person cannot improve their
> driving.
An older perosn may not need to improve their driving
>
>> There is a current attitude in the UK that road traffic law is unlike
>> other areas of legislation and that breaking such laws is our
>> fundamental right. I watched a young woman only yesterday driving two
>> small children, presumably to school, with one hand clamping her mobile
>> phone to her ear. If she was even caught, how would she be punished?
>> An irritating fine and three penalty points she can wear with some sort
>> of perverse pride, as some sort of battle scars?
>
> And think how much worse it could be with an old fogey behind the wheel
> with phone clamped to earhole.
>
>> Elderly drivers need to consider their fitness to drive, of course, and
>
> If they can.
>
>> there are provisions in place, however inadequate at present,
>
> And that is a reason to leave it as it is?
>
>> to address
>> this.
>
> I don't think so.
>
>> But if we're going to ban drivers en masse(and I'm not saying I'd
>> be opposed to the idea) let's at least target the people who cause the
>> majority of the problems.
>
> The younger driver is not an appropriate target population for that sort
> of ban but the elderly are.

The figures show otherwise.

Look at the meadian age of death.
Subtract 70 from that.
take that figure add it to 17.
look at how many KSI are caused by the group between that figure and 17
compare with the number of KSI caused by those between 70 and median age
of death.

I'm sure that the results ( if you bother to do the comparison) will
show that a ban of younger drivers would be more appropriate.

[Dan Gregory]

Bernie wrote:

>
> I would agree that 70 and over is too old for driving motor vehicles
> generally speaking.

This would "generally" seem to mean that you are beginning to feel old
yourself - whatever your age.
;-))

[Barb]

Loads of interesting comments here. But we have to be careful setting
arbitrary age limits. Dealing with this isn't always easy .....

My aunt has just given up driving - thank God! - at 80, and she was
becoming a serious menace. Not just because of her failing eyesight but
because of here general confusion and total inability to "read" the road,
which is lethal in terms of todays traffic levels. She uses a zimmer frame
and cannot possibly have the strength in her legs to cope with a true
emergency stop. She had also "forgotten" to tax or insure her car (horrible
to think of a fatal or maiming accident with someone else!!!).

The point is ....neither the doctor, nor the Social Services were able to do
anything about this, in spite of enquiries from relatives, and we were just
waiting for the accident to happen. They really should have more power
here! We were on the verge of trying the police when a helpful relative came
and took the car away "for a service" and never took it back.

However, I am nearly 60 and would be considered "old" by many (!). I am an
accident-free driver since I can't remember (touch wood!) and drove round BC
Canada in 2005 and down the Pacific Coast Highway US last year.

I hope I am sensible enough to see the writing on the wall when it comes!

As for cycling, I ride very, very defensively. I give everyone plenty of
room, wear bright colours/bands etc. and have a loud horn as well as a bell,
which, I have to say, I use when I suspect I haven't been seen.

I hope I survive!

Barb

"Bernie" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 20:17:04 +0100, Eatmorepies wrote:
>
>>
>> "dannyfrankszzz" >
>> wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> In the past week, on 3 occasions I've been nearly very badly injured by
>>> inept elderly drivers. The problem is that on all 3 occasions they
>>> simply did not see me. Even when I shouted loudly at them, they seemed
>>> to be completely oblivious.
>>>
>>> I live in an affluent area of London and so I guess there are probably
>>> more old people around with nice cars and time on their hands than in
>>> other areas.
>>>
>>> However, it is incredibly irritating when people don't drive properly
>>> regardless of age.
>>>
>>> This is something that's going to become more of a problem and is
>>> something the government is going to need to think about. Personally,
>>> I'd ban people over the age of 70 from driving.
>>>
>>
>> An arbitary age limit is too blunt an instrument - I suspect men aged
>> 18-23
>> are much more dangerous. Take the obviously bad ones off the road, a few
>> more police on patrol might help with this one.
>>
>> On another tack, were you helping drivers to see you? When I go out in
>> dull
>> conditions or ride in high traffic conditions I wear a hi vis jacket or
>> waistcoat.
>
> I always wear black. Black bike too.
>
> The people who come too close to me have always been old fogeys.
>
> I would agree that 70 and over is too old for driving motor vehicles
> generally speaking.
>
>
>
>
>

[John Pitcock]

It took several years to persuade our parents to give up driving in their
70's because their driving concerned us. As their car only went 500 miles
per year it would have been cheaper to use taxis.

I'm an IAM observer and have had several people in their 70's, and one age
82, pass the IAM test.

I've been knocked off my bike once - at low speed by an elderly woman who
either didn't see me right in front of her or couldn't work out how to
brake.

[Brian G]

Bernie wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 15:01:42 +0100, Brian G wrote:

>> There is a current attitude in the UK that road traffic law is unlike
>> other areas of legislation and that breaking such laws is our
>> fundamental right. I watched a young woman only yesterday driving two
>> small children, presumably to school, with one hand clamping her mobile
>> phone to her ear. If she was even caught, how would she be punished?
>> An irritating fine and three penalty points she can wear with some sort
>> of perverse pride, as some sort of battle scars?
>
> And think how much worse it could be with an old fogey behind the wheel
> with phone clamped to earhole.


Your use of a phrase like "old fogey" amply demonstrates the validity
of your points, I think. "Fogeys" can be found in any age band in the
adult population.

--
Brian G
www.wetwo.co.uk

[p.k.[_2_]]

Bernie wrote:

> Old people who don't have the reaction times of younger people should
> be banned from the road.

that is not an argument for banning old people, it is an argument for
banning anyone of any age whose reaction time falls below a defined level.

But the very principle is flawed, as Young drivers *tend* to drive more
quickly and need better reactions than
older drivers who *tend* to drive more slowly.

Also, my daughter is 18, just passed her test and is in my assessment a good
but inexperienced driver who does not drive at excessive speed but her
responses to new events are glacial in comparison to an experienced driver
as she analyses for first principles each new hazard, event or traffic
condition.

There is a certain irony in the prejudice shown here by cyclists toward
elderly drivers simply on grounds of age, while at the same time taking
umbrage against drivers (of any age) who are prejudiced against cyclists.

pk

[Clive George]

"p.k." > wrote in message
...

> There is a certain irony in the prejudice shown here by cyclists toward
> elderly drivers simply on grounds of age, while at the same time taking
> umbrage against drivers (of any age) who are prejudiced against cyclists.

OI! Less of the generalisation here, please.

clive

[Bernie]

On Fri, 21 Sep 2007 11:33:23 +0100, Dan Gregory wrote:

> Bernie wrote:
>
>>
>> I would agree that 70 and over is too old for driving motor vehicles
>> generally speaking.
>
> This would "generally" seem to mean that you are beginning to feel old
> yourself - whatever your age.
> ;-))

Well whatever but I meant competent 70 year old drivers not withstanding.
There are always exceptions but since when have we ever let that or them
get in the way of legislation.

[Paul Boyd[_2_]]

On 20/09/2007 16:15, said,

> I think you can get a motability car even if you can't physically
> drive. The idea being that then your carer can drive you around.
> BICBW.

That's a very good point, and now you mention it, it does sort of ring a
bell.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

[hyweldavies]

>
> > But if we're going to ban drivers en masse(and I'm not saying I'd
> > be opposed to the idea) let's at least target the people who cause the
> > majority of the problems.
>
> The younger driver is not an appropriate target population for that sort
> of ban but the elderly are.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Is that a question or a statement ?

If we were serious about road safety we'd probably ban everyone under
30 from driving.

But we're not, so people bleat about the elderly instead. Blame a
convenient minority. Ok some are past driving, or driving far, or at
night, and many do make reasonable judgements to cut down or stop. As
a forty year old bloke I'm in the so-say sensible bracket, but still
make errors or don't see something till a bit late, despite trying my
best. And I was did my share of bad driving when younger - though
ironically when I was an older young person when I thought I'd got the
hang of it.

In my experience the elderly dither along, and are fairly obviously
going to do an unexpected right turn or whatever, but you can see
they're dithering and hence expect the unexpected so to speak. They're
generally going slow so it's hardly a problem. To be fair, the OP
mentioned specific "didn't see you" type incidents, but again the
young lad who didn't see you is going a lot faster, and the younger
peeps are the ones who tend to be agressive. I'd prefer dozy to
agressive driving, bordering on murderous in many cases. And as for
young mother in 4x4s - ban the lot ! (irony)

Hywel

[hyweldavies]

On Sep 21, 4:28 pm, "p.k." > wrote:
> Bernie wrote:
> > Old people who don't have the reaction times of younger people should
> > be banned from the road.
>
> that is not an argument for banning old people, it is an argument for
> banning anyone of any age whose reaction time falls below a defined level.
>
> But the very principle is flawed, as Young drivers *tend* to drive more
> quickly and need better reactions than
> older drivers who *tend* to drive more slowly.
>
> Also, my daughter is 18, just passed her test and is in my assessment a good
> but inexperienced driver who does not drive at excessive speed but her
> responses to new events are glacial in comparison to an experienced driver
> as she analyses for first principles each new hazard, event or traffic
> condition.
>
> There is a certain irony in the prejudice shown here by cyclists toward
> elderly drivers simply on grounds of age, while at the same time taking
> umbrage against drivers (of any age) who are prejudiced against cyclists.
>
> pk

Reaction times are very over-rated for driving. The trick is to not
need your reaction times.
Having done motorcycle training (long after learning to drive a car)
which stressed very very systematic observation, I took this on board
and now very rarely need to react much at all. Leaving lots of room is
good too. Wasn't the case when I was younger and had much better
reaction times, which I needed quite regularly. It's more than just
being a bit more sensible now I'm older, it's more about being more
systematic.

Hywel

[Dylan Smith]

On 2007-09-20, dannyfrankszzz > wrote:
> This is something that's going to become more of a problem and is
> something the government is going to need to think about. Personally,
> I'd ban people over the age of 70 from driving.

Don't forget you might be 70 one day.

Arbitrary cut-offs are a retarded idea. Driving bans like this should be
based on only two things: medical fitness and competence... regardless
of age.

For my US drivers license (Texas) it had to be renewed every 5 years and
this included a real eye test - not squint at the numberplate at some
arbitrary number of yards, but an optical device that tested that both
eyes met the standard. We should be doing that here - for all ages.
People can develop defective vision before they are 30.

Additionally, when drivers licenses expire, they should really truly
expire - you have to take your test again to get your license back. As a
private pilot, I have to take a biennial flight review even though I
pose significantly less public danger in our Auster aircraft than a
lorry driver, who once has passed is good for life.

Incidentally, I was hit only three months ago by a 70+ year old driver
who didn't see me on a straight road in broad daylight. However, that
doesn't necessarily mean that ALL drivers over 70 are incompetent - to
blanket ban the over 70s regardless of fitness or competence would be a
gross injustice.

--
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de

[Dylan Smith]

On 2007-09-20, Eatmorepies > wrote:
> On another tack, were you helping drivers to see you? When I go out in dull
> conditions or ride in high traffic conditions I wear a hi vis jacket or
> waistcoat. I know that in dull conditions that when I'm driving my car some
> cyclists/pedestrians are very hard to see.

It's not just dull conditions. After being hit on a bright day on a
straight road wearing light clothes and being clearly visible, I
carefully observed what stood out and what didn't.

Dull conditions are an obvious one - but less obvious is bright sunny
conditions. If you're driving into sun (even with the sun still high
in the sky, and not shining in the drivers eyes), and you're still in
the sunshine, pedestrians and cyclists who are ahead and under the trees
become much harder to see and high vis doesn't seem to help much. One
thing I noticed is in these conditions, motorcycle brake lights
(particularly the new LED brake lights) are highly visible. This was the
inspiration for my Lumileds Luxeon Ray-o-Death rear bike light
consisting of six 1 watt LEDs, which I specifically made as a daylight
conspicuity light, using a flash pattern. (Testing it out on myself, the
flash was visible in peripheral vision too, so hopefully it'll catch the
attention of drivers who are head down fiddling with the radio or their
phone).

--
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de

[Helen Deborah Vecht]

Dylan Smith >typed


> On 2007-09-20, Eatmorepies > wrote:
> > On another tack, were you helping drivers to see you? When I go out
> > in dull
> > conditions or ride in high traffic conditions I wear a hi vis jacket or
> > waistcoat. I know that in dull conditions that when I'm driving my
> > car some
> > cyclists/pedestrians are very hard to see.

> It's not just dull conditions. After being hit on a bright day on a
> straight road wearing light clothes and being clearly visible, I
> carefully observed what stood out and what didn't.

'Hi-vis' fluorescent yellow is not very conspicuous in the presence of
much pale foliage on a sunny day. I suspect black would show up
better...

--
Helen D. Vecht:
Edgware.

[The Luggage]

On 22 Sep, 21:55, hyweldavies > wrote:

>
> If we were serious about road safety we'd probably ban everyone under
> 30 from driving.

It's not age that's the problem, but lack of experience. How about we
ban everyone with less than 10 years driving experience from the
roads. In about 60 years, we'd solve all the problems mentioned here,
and be a good way to fixing global wrming too!

TL